Thanks to all my readers. It gives boost when I get calls from my readers and am always happy to revert back to my followers and readers. I am sorry if I am unable to reply to all the e-mails due to my busy schedule. Contact me for any type of assignments help(nominal charges). Thanks and Regards, Er. Bhavi Bhatia e-mail: bhavi.bhatia.411@gmail.com Phone: +91-9779703714, +91-9814614666

1. Table of contents:
Task Contents
1 Select a research question
Explain the factors that contribute to the process of successful
research question selection.
Justify their choice of research question
2 Conduct research to find literature relevant to the research question
Undertake a critical review of the key literature for inclusion in a
research proposal
3 Evaluate techniques for use with quantitative data in a research
proposal
Evaluate techniques for use with qualitative data in a research
proposal
4 Evaluate appropriate research methodologies in terms of the research
question.
Choose an appropriate methodology in terms of the research question
Justify the methodology selected in terms of the research question
5 Record findings on a research question, literature review and
methodology in an agreed format
Summarise the findings using suitable methods
Present the findings using suitable methods
Critically analyse the findings

2. Introduction
A research question is the methodological point of departure of scholarly research in both
the natural sciences and humanities. The research will answer any question posed. At
an undergraduate level, the answer to the research question is the thesis statement.
Importance:
The research question is one of the first methodological steps the investigator has to take when
undertaking research. The research question must be accurately and clearly defined.
Choosing a research question is the central element of both quantitative and qualitative
research and in some cases it may precede construction of the conceptual framework of study. In
all cases, it makes the theoretical assumptions in the framework more explicit, most of all it
indicates what the researcher wants to know most and first.
Uses:
The student or researcher then carries out the research necessary to answer the research question,
whether this involves reading secondary over a few days for an undergraduate term paper or
carrying out primary research over years for a major project.
Once the research is complete and the researcher knows the (probable) answer to the research
question, writing can begin. In term papers, the answer to the question is normally given in
summary in the introduction in the form of a thesis statement.

3. Task 1 - Select and justify the choice of research question
Task 1.1 Select a research question
“Factors that contribute to the process of successful research question selection”
1.2 Explain the factors that contribute to the process of successful research
question selection
The research problem is often argued as the heart of the research process, without which no
research process can take place. In formulating the problem the variables must be eminent and
easily identifiable while a hypothesis should accompany each research problem. Once a research
problem is clearly defined, it should be translated into a research hypothesis that states; a
relationship between two or more variables into one or more populations.
Thus the assignment will reflect on the linkage of the research problem, research hypothesis and
the existing variables. Firstly, the research problem will be explored, its importance, sources of
the research problem, considerations as well as steps to be followed when formulating a research
problem. Secondly, identification of variables will be discussed using the three common types of
variables and the four prominent scales of measurement.
The research problem is the heart of the research process hence cannot be selected in a vacuum
thus some considerations and factors have to be considered. Sources
of research problems revolve around the four P‟s, People, Problems, Programs, and Phenomena.
Formulation of a research problem is a process thus involves following steps. Variables are
measurable factors that can assume more than one value
andthree types of important variables can distinguished; independent, dependant andextraneous
variables. Nominal scale, ordinal scale, interval scale and ratio scale are the different types of
measurement scale which we use to classify variables. A hypothesis is
a tentative statement of the results of an investigation indicating the relationshipbetween two or
more variables that awaits verification. Hypotheses enable theresearcher to add the formulation o
f theory if proved to be true. The researchhypothesis and the alternate hypothesis are the most
important when carrying out or analyzing research.

4. 1.3 Justify their choice of research question
The objective of this report is to gain a better understanding of the factors that support and
enable a collaborative effort in South African companies. The benefits from collaborate are
significant and the findings could enable companies to attain these benefits. The predominant
area of focus was four research questions dealing with relationships and selection factors, these
focused on complexity, trust, culture and impact of selection area.

5. Task 2: Literature Review
2.1 Conduct research to find literature relevant to the research question
The literature review includes a number of areas that have bearing on the topic of both
collaboration and the factors that lead to collaboration. The studies are primarily focused on the
application of collaboration in the business environment. The literature reviews was instrumental
in formulating the question that were then covered in the questionnaire.
There are multiple aspects to the requirement to the successful collaboration. The literature
review is divided into four areas. First area covers the relationship factors that are supportive of
the collaborative effort. The intent is to provide an insight into both how relationships are
perceived and measured, and impact of these relationships on long term efforts.
The second area covers the selection factors that are necessary at the time of entering into a
collaborative agreement. The importance of ensuring the correct partner for a value effort is
highlighted in the literature and what the organizations should be aware of when deciding on
partners.
The third area is the cultural environment and its effect on collaborative efforts. The purpose was
to understand if some of the organizational and country culture aspects have affected the ability
to successfully collaborate.
Finally, the area of collaboration itself is covered in the literature, under various names, and the
important aspects of collaboration are investigated to understand the environmental factors
surrounding and the drivers behind entering into a collaborative effort.
2.2 Undertake a critical review of the key literature for inclusion in a research
proposal
A literature review is an objective, thorough summary and critical analysis of the relevant
available research and non-Patricia Cronin, Frances Ryan, Michael Coughlan research literature
on the topic being studied (Hart, 1998). Its goal is to bring the reader up-to-date with current
literature on a topic and form the basis for another goal, such as the justification for future
research in the area. A good literature review gathers information about a particular subject from
many sources. It is well written and contains few if any personal biases. It should contain a clear
search and selection strategy (Carnwell and Daly, 2001). Good structuring is essential to enhance
the flow and readability of the review. Accurate use of terminology is important and jargon
should be kept to a minimum. Referencing should be accurate throughout (Colling, 2003).

6. Selecting a review topic can be a daunting task for students and novice reviewers (Timmins and
McCabe, 2005). A common error for novices is to select a review title that is all encompassing,
such as „pressure ulcers‟ or „pain‟. Although this may be a useful initial strategy for determining
how much literature is available, subjects such as these generate a considerable amount of data
making a review infeasible. Therefore, it is advisable to refine this further so that the final
amount of information generated is manageable. For example, to focus the topic of interest,
consider what aspects of pressure ulcers or pain are of particular significance. Is there a specific
element of this topic that is of interest, such as prevention or management? Identifying what
exactly is of interest and why can help refine the topic (Hendry and Farley, 1998). Talking to
others, such as clinical specialists, or reading around a topic can also help to identify what areas
of the subject the reviewer is interested in and may help indicate how much information exists on
the topic (Timmins and McCabe, 2005). Having sufficient literature is also important,
particularly when the review is an academic assignment. These academic exercises usually have
short deadlines, so having enough literature is key from the perspective of being able to do the
review and submit it on time. Attempting to change the topic close to the deadline for submission
is usually a recipe for disaster so select an area that will hold your interest and ensure that there
is enough data to meet your needs. Literature reviews that are part of academic course work
usually have strictly enforced word limits and it is important to adhere to that limit. Topics that
are too broad will result in reviews that are either too long or too superficial. As a rule of thumb,
it is better to start with a narrow and focused topic, and if necessary broaden the scope of the
review as you progress. It is much more difficult to cut content successfully, especially if time is
short.

7. Task 3 - Analyzing Data for a Research Proposal
3.1 Evaluate techniques for use with quantitative data in a research proposal
At this point of the process, what has been determined as appropriate literature will have been
gathered. While the focus of the literature may vary depending on the overall purpose, there are
several useful strategies for the analysis and synthesis stages that will help the construction and
writing of the review. Initially, it is advisable to undertake a first read of the articles that have
been collected to get a sense of what they are about. Most published articles contain a summary
or abstract at the beginning of the paper, which will assist with this process and enable the
decision as to whether it is worthy of further reading or inclusion. At this point, it may also be of
benefit to undertake an initial classification and grouping of the articles by type of source. Once
the initial overview has been completed it is necessary to return to the articles to undertake a
more systematic and critical review of the content. It is recommended that some type of structure
is adopted during this process such as that proposed by Cohen (1990). This simple method is
referred to as the preview, question, read, summarize (PQRS) system and it not only keeps you
focussed and consistent but ultimately facilitates easy identification and retrieval of material
particularly if a large number of publications are being reviewed.
Following the preview stage, a reviewer may end up with four stacks of articles that are deemed
relevant to the purpose of the review. Although some papers may have been discarded at this
point, it is probably wise to store them should you need to retrieve them at a later stage.
In the question stage, questions are asked of each publication. Here several writers have
suggested using an indexing or summary system (or a combination of both) to assist the process
(Patrick and Munro, 2004; Polit and Beck, 2004; Timmins and McCabe, 2005; Burns and Grove,
2007). Although there are slight variations in the criteria proposed in the indexing and summary
systems, generally they are concerned with the title of the article, the author, the purpose and
methodology used in a research study, and findings and outcomes. It is also useful to incorporate
comments or key thoughts on your response to the article after it has been reviewed. For the
purpose of good record keeping, it is suggested that the source and full reference are also
included. It can be very frustrating trying to locate a reference or a key point among a plethora of
articles at a later stage.
As it is likely that not all of the articles will be primary sources, you may wish to adapt your
summary system to accommodate other sources, such as systematic reviews or non-research
literature. Although it may be laborious at times, each article should be read while trying to
answer the questions in the grid. It is worth noting, however, that if any aspect of the appraisal is
not clear, it may be beneficial to access more detailed tools or checklists that facilitate further
analysis or critique. While most research textbooks contain tools for critique, novice reviewers
can find them difficult to negotiate given their complexity. In recognition of the different types
of questions needed to appraise research studies, the critical appraisal skills programme (CASP)

8. within the public health resource unit (www.phru.nhs.uk) has several checklists that enable users
to make sense of qualitative research, reviews, randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and
case control studies, among others.
Like primary sources, not all reviews classed as secondary sources are the same. For example,
systematic reviews follow strict criteria and are appraised on those (Parahoo, 2006). However,
there are reviews that simply present a perspective on a topic or explore the relevance of a
concept for practice. Some theoretical papers, such as concept, analysis may fall into this
bracket. If appraised against the criteria for evaluating systematic reviews, these publications
would be found lacking in this area. Therefore, an important first step in the appraisal of a review
is to determine its original purpose and perspective. In this way it will be possible to determine
appropriate evaluation questions.
3.2 Evaluate techniques for use with qualitative data in a research proposal
Most students and beginning researchers do not fully understand what a research proposal
means, nor do they understand its importance. To put it bluntly, one's research is only as a good
as one's proposal. An ill-conceived proposal dooms the project even if it somehow gets through
the Thesis Supervisory Committee. A high quality proposal, on the other hand, not only promises
success for the project, but also impresses your Thesis Committee about your potential as a
researcher.
A research proposal is intended to convince others that you have a worthwhile research project
and that you have the competence and the work-plan to complete it. Generally, a research
proposal should contain all the key elements involved in the research process and include
sufficient information for the readers to evaluate the proposed study.
Regardless of your research area and the methodology you choose, all research proposals must
address the following questions: What you plan to accomplish, why you want to do it and how
you are going to do it.
The proposal should have sufficient information to convince your readers that you have an
important research idea, that you have a good grasp of the relevant literature and the major
issues, and that your methodology is sound.
The quality of your research proposal depends not only on the quality of your proposed project,
but also on the quality of your proposal writing. A good research project may run the risk of
rejection simply because the proposal is poorly written. Therefore, it pays if your writing is
coherent, clear and compelling.
This paper focuses on proposal writing rather than on the development of research ideas.

9. Title:
It should be concise and descriptive. For example, the phrase, "An investigation of . . ." could be
omitted. Often titles are stated in terms of a functional relationship, because such titles clearly
indicate the independent and dependent variables. However, if possible, think of an informative
but catchy title. An effective title not only pricks the reader's interest, but also predisposes
him/her favourably towards the proposal.
Abstract:
It is a brief summary of approximately 300 words. It should include the research question, the
rationale for the study, the hypothesis (if any), the method and the main findings. Descriptions of
the method may include the design, procedures, the sample and any instruments that will be
used.
Introduction:
The main purpose of the introduction is to provide the necessary background or context for your
research problem. How to frame the research problem is perhaps the biggest problem in proposal
writing.
The introduction typically begins with a general statement of the problem area, with a focus on a
specific research problem, to be followed by the rational or justification for the proposed study.
Literature Review:
Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introduction section. However, most
professors prefer a separate section, which allows a more thorough review of the literature.
Methods:
The Method section is very important because it tells your Research Committee how you plan to
tackle your research problem. It will provide your work plan and describe the activities necessary
for the completion of your project.
The guiding principle for writing the Method section is that it should contain sufficient
information for the reader to determine whether methodology is sound. Some even argue that a
good proposal should contain sufficient details for another qualified researcher to implement the
study.
You need to demonstrate your knowledge of alternative methods and make the case that your
approach is the most appropriate and most valid way to address your research question.

10. Results:
Obviously you do not have results at the proposal stage. However, you need to have some idea
about what kind of data you will be collecting, and what statistical procedures will be used in
order to answer your research question or test you hypothesis.
Discussion:
It is important to convince your reader of the potential impact of your proposed research. You
need to communicate a sense of enthusiasm and confidence without exaggerating the merits of
your proposal. That is why you also need to mention the limitations and weaknesses of the
proposed research, which may be justified by time and financial constraints as well as by the
early developmental stage of your research area.

11. Task 4 - Presenting a Research Proposal and its Evaluation
4.1 Evaluate appropriate research methodologies in terms of the research
question
Quantitative Methods
In quantitative research the data collected takes the form of measurements or counts which can
be statistically analysed. The process of quantitative research follows standard procedures,
methods, forms of analysis and reporting the results of the research undertaken. This
standardisation maximises objectivity.
Quantitative methods can be used for comparison of subgroups and analysis is generally
conducted through statistics. The method is based on meanings derived from numbers and results
are numerical and standardised data.
Quantitative methods use numbers and statistics. General sequence:
1. Observe/present questionnaire/ask questions with fixed answers
2. Tabulate
3. Summarise data
4. Analyse data
5. Draw conclusions
Qualitative Methods
Qualitative research offers insights and understandings of participants, which is unobtainable by
quantitative research, but is more than just non-numerical research. It aims to study the subject in
their natural surroundings and to collect naturally occurring, non-biased data. It describes in
words, rather than numbers, the qualities of the subject through observation. Methods of
qualitative research include structured and unstructured interviews, group interviews and focus
groups.
Qualitative methods can highlight key themes or patterns emerging in the project, are used to
comprehend and manage data and used to develop and test hypothesises.

12. There are, naturally, weaknesses with qualitative research. The result is less easily generalised
than with quantitative methods.
Qualitative methods use descriptions and categories. General sequence:
1. Observe/ask questions with open-ended answers
2. Record what is said and/or done
3. Interpret
4. Return to observe/ask more questions
5. (recurring cycles of 2-4 iteration)
6. Theorising
7. Draw conclusions
Comparison:
Qualitative Research Quantitative Research
phenomenological positivistic
inductive deductive
holistic particularistic
subjective centered objective centered
process oriented outcome oriented
anthropological worldview natural science worldview
relative lack of control attempted control of variables
dynamic reality assumed static reality assumed
discovery orientated verification orientated
explanatory confirmatory
adapted from Cook and Reichardt (1979)

13. 4.2 Choose an appropriate methodology in terms of the research question
In terms of research question, the appropriate methodology would be Qualitative Research, the
reasons being discussed above.

14. Task 5.1 Record findings on a research question, literature review and
methodology in an agreed format

15. References
1. Andersen, E.S., Grude, K.V., and Hang, T. 1995. Goal Directed Project Management:
Effective techniques and strategies (trans. From Norwegian by Roberta Wiig), 2nd edn.
London: Kogan Page.
2. Appelo, J. 2009. What is the Mission of Your Project? Retrieved May 12, 2009, from
www.projectsmart.co.uk
3. www.hfrp.org
4. www.oppapers.com
5. Heneman, R., Waldeck, N. & Cushnie, M. (1996). Diversity considerations in staffing
decisionmaking. In E. Kossek & S. Lobel (eds) Managing Diversity: Human Resource
Strategies for Transforming the Workplace. Oxford: Blackwell.
6. Johnson, L. & Johnstone, S. (2000). The legislative framework. In G. Kirton & A. Greene
(eds) The Dynamics of Managing Diversity. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
7. Rees, T. (1998). Mainstreaming Equality in the European Union. London: Routledge.
Richards, W. (2000). Evaluating equal opportunities initiatives: the case for a
„transformative‟ agenda. In M. Noon&E. Ogbonna (eds) Equality, Diversity and
Disadvantage in Employment. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
8. Matsuno, K., & Mentzer, J. T. (2000), “The effects of strategy type on the market
orientation– performance relationship”, Journal of Marketing, Vol.64, pp.1 –16.
9. Gonzalez- Benito Oscar & Gonzalez- Benito Javier (2005), “Cultural vs. operational
market orientation and objective vs. subjective performance: perspective of production
and operation”, Journal of Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 34, No. 8, pp.797-829.
10. www.corporate.marks&spencers.com
11. www.health.vic.gov.au
12. www.managementhelp.org